Posts by Craig Young
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The antis also regularly use junk 'science' to get their points across with the following methodological flaws:
-small sample sizes
-short sample durations
-inferential jumps that cannot be supported by the data
-establishing parallel anti-abortion professional organisations to mainstream counterparts.
-reheating and tweaking unrepresentative data sets from otherwise pro-choice research results
-refusing to acknowledge their conservative Catholic/fundamentalist Protestant/religious social conservative anti-abortion interpretative bias at the onset
-misrepresenting the safety of abortion procedures; misrepresenting psychological sequelae of abortion; manufacturing 'post-abortion trauma' within conservative Christian anti-abortion groups; misrepresenting embryonic and fetal development;
lying about fetal neurohormonal development and response to pain stimuli; downplaying adverse results of pregnancy and childbirth; imposing onerous 'targeted regulation' of abortion providers (TRAP); banning late-term abortions without regard for lethal fetal abnormalities or threats to women's lives and health through pregnancy continuation; blocking access to emergency contraception because it is "abortifacient"; concealing their conservative Catholic animus against contraception and evidence-based comprehensive sex education. -
Yes, as long as they're pro-choice women. Remember Margaret Austin (Labour) and Judy Turner (United Future) from the eighties and nineties? And I agree, it was truly obscene that a predominantly male Parliament made the decision to exclude rape from the CSA Act.
At present, there's a theoretical split between the 'moderate' antis in Voice for Life, who "only" want "informed consent" (sic: translation: forcing women to watch mendacious anti-abortion propaganda that totally misrepresents embryonic and fetal development), parental 'notification and consent' (sic: translation: which means forcing pregnant incest survivors to go through a circuitous judicial bypass process) ad nauseum... and Right to Life New Zealand, hardliners that want abortion prohibited. In practice, the theoretical split is rather hazy- look at their website link pages. The NZ antis are supplied with propaganda, tactical and strategic advice from US anti-abortion groups such as National Right to Life and the American Life League. Fortunately, they suffered heavy attrition due to their aged composition. There have been a number of shortlived satellites of RTL and VFL over the years such as tertiary student anti-abortion groups, 'abortion survivor' fundamentalist womens groups etc.
-
Note the Christian Right's role in this. SPUC/Voice for Life forced the current quasi-criminal twilight zone into law, although it's a case of liberal interpretation versus theoretically conservative legislation. However, the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977 does not contain any legislative definition of embryo or foetus, disclosed when one anti-abortion GP tried to obstruct one woman's abortion access (Wall v Livingston 1983). This led to the last Muldoon era attempt to prohibit abortion, the draconian "Status of the Unborn Child Bill" 1983, which failed. The anti-abortionists had a massive tanty and started picketing and then invading abortion clinics (Operation Rescue). That failed, leading to the current longterm stalemate, in which abortion is accessible and yet theoretically "illegal", although, as Emma correctly points out, S 187A of the Crimes Act 1961 provides a window of opportunity for abortion access. Most are performed on mental health grounds through a cumbersome dual certifying consultant system and regulated by the Abortion Supervisory Committee. This is ridiculous. Male homosexuality and sex work have been decriminalised, why not abortion rights? It's been done in Canada, Victoria, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania already. Furthermore, the number of abortions is gradually declining as more effective contraceptives become available. One ghastly aspect of the current CSA Act is that it doesn't include a clause about rape as a qualifying ground.
-
Speaker: Abortion: morality and health, in reply to kiwi_guy,
Takes two to tango, sport. Ever heard of condoms?
-
Hard News: Synthetic cannabis: it just…, in reply to Andre,
Exactly. P/crystal meth is far more lucrative for criminal enterprises and easy to manufacture. I tend to be a reformist rather an abolitionist when it comes to drug policy reform because while potheads are annoying obsessive single-issue drones, I have little problem with them lighting up as long as they do it safely, not around kids and in the privacy of their own homes. Unfortunately, ALCP and NORML are their own worst enemies. Why can't NZ cannabis reformers study the US decriminalisation movement and emulate them? It's worked over there.
-
Hard News: News from home ..., in reply to Russell Brown,
Never say never, Russell. I am inclined to give Andrew Little the benefit of the doubt and not play identity politics. Although perhaps the party should reconsider the primary format for its leadership elections, and preferential voting as its electoral system in that context.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Hilary Stace,
Someone needs to lobby/cajole/harass/shame academic publishers into funding volumes about disabled histories.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Sacha,
It's a term used in organisational psychology and human resource management. It means the set of values,norms, expectations and professional practice and its directives that adhere within particular organisations.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to David Herkt,
Ah, Intensive Care, my favourite Frame novel. I would love some talented media figure to film the last third of that book and its nightmarish anodyne future of disability cleansing in post-apocalyptic NZ. Heavy hint hint to anyone tempted to do so :)
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Sacha,
Depends on the group's occupational culture and origins, really. I got seriously annoyed with the conservative leadership of a mental health consumers group I belonged to, given that I supported a citizenship and social justice model of psychiatric disability and she seemed to believe that it should just be a derivative adjunct of the mental health system.
So I left. I'm now involved with a far stroppier and more assertive local diabetes group and much, much happier with its occupational culture and governing philosophy.